"NoShit, Sherlock ..."

Year to date statistics on Airport screening from the Department of Homeland Security:
Terrorist Plots Discovered
0
Transvestites
133
Hernias
1,485
Hemorrhoid Cases
3,172
Enlarged Prostates
8,249
Breast Implants
59,350
Natural Blondes
3

  • Groundhog Day

    01.03.2011: No Shit, Dick Tracy!

    In 2011, both Groundhog Day and the State of the Union address are scheduled on the same day.

    It's an ironic juxtaposition of events; one event involves a meaningless ritual in which we look to a creature of limited intelligence for prognostication . . . while the other involves a groundhog.


  • Arnold

    01.01.2011: You tell 'em, Arnold! !

    I've already given up...

    . . . As former Speaker of the State Assembly and San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown pointed out earlier this year in the San Francisco Chronicle, roughly 80 cents of every government dollar in California goes to employee compensation and benefits. . . .

    Having slain the golden geese, public employee unions berate the corpses and hector them to resume laying golden eggs.

    and here's a footnote if that wasn't enough for you...

    http://www.dailybreeze.com/ci_16966578?IADID=Search-www.dailybreeze.com-www.dailybreeze.com

    OAKLAND - Top executives at the University of California are threatening to sue if employees earning more than $245,000 annually do not receive a major pension hike.

    The demand appears in a Dec. 9 letter and position paper to the UC Board of Regents obtained by the San Francisco Chronicle.

    The university estimates that agreeing to the hike would add $5.5 million yearly to its already $21.6 billion unfunded pension liability. It also would have to pay a one-time $51 million to make the increases retroactive to 2007.

    Currently pensions are calculated as a percentage of the first $245,000 earned by an employee.

    The executives say the regents agreed in 1999 to hike pensions once the Internal Revenue Service allowed them to lift the $245,000 cap. The IRS rescinded the limit in 2007.

    Repeat after me: "Doomed."


  • Allen West

    11.17.2010: Lt. Col. Allen West for President!

    He's got my vote lined up already! Wow!


  • Democrats (2)

    11.14.2010: Democrats doing stupid things... again

    And now, in the center ring, for your amusement and amazement... watch the video...
    Obama White House Hands Out 111 Obamacare Waivers- Hides It From Public (video)


  • Democrats (1)

    11.12.2010: Democrats saying stupid things.mp4

    Where does "funny" end and "tragic" begin?... watch the video...


  • Voters Are Watching

    11.12.2010: Yes, Republicans (and Democrats, too...), The Voters ARE Watching ...:


  • Gipper

    11.09.2010: Bring Back the Gipper... or at least, find someone like him ...: Watch Here...


  • Candidates

    11.06.2010: Spot on, Ken:

    The conversation...

    Ken: We have now had an application of EMG. If the new crop of Senators and Representatives get the message, we won't need another one. If they don't, I am prepared to iterate until done. Eventually some level of future successors *will* get the message.

    Tom: The problem, however, with "iterate until done" is the same as finding a race horse that can clear a twenty-foot hurdle: try the next horse in line; if it misses, shoot it and go on the next until you find a horse that can do it. Or until you run out of horses. I'm not willing to believe there are enough people who meet the two criteria: "get" it, and want to be a politician. I'm still in favour of "none of the above".

    Ken: I suggest that your analogy is not applicable. Let me propose two other possible analogies, which I believe are closer.

    Let's say I am the coach of an NFL team, who really needs a wide receiver. He must be very fast, and be able to catch the ball. If I hire a guy who is an Olympic weight-lifter who is very slow and cannot catch, I recognize that even though he is world-class at lifting heavy bar-bells, but he cannot do what I need done, I will fire him. If I then hire a guy who is an Olympic marathoner who cannot sprint and cannot catch, I recognize that even though he can run 26 miles better than anyone else in the world, but he cannot do what I need done, I will fire him. I will "iterate until done" until I find a guy who can do what I need done.

    Or let's say that I am a homeowner who wants to level a piece of ground which is now lumpy and overgrown, in order to put in a simple lawn. If I interview somebody who shows me the majestic mountains he has built with the incredibly fancy gardens he has put in for other people in the past, I will acknowledge the excellence of the work, say "thanks but no thanks" because that is not what I want done. And I will keep interviewing people until I find one who will take out some of the dirt in my piece of ground and put in just a lawn, because I don't want anything more than that.

    There is no "shoot it" involved here, nor is there any denigration of the people we voted against. They are doing great work at what they want (growing government), but it isn't the work that I want (shrinking government). Let's try something different: hiring people who will agree to try to do what I want them to do, and firing of people who (whatever their promises during the sales cycle) consistently do something opposite to what I (and the majority of the people who voted in the last election) want accomplished.

    And I believe that we won't run out people who will try to get hired. We saw a lot of people volunteer to run this time around, people who have never been involved in politics before. Some of them were excellent (Rubio), some of them were good but didn't make it (Angle), some of them weren't the best candidates in history (O'Donnell). Ok, there is always next election, and the best will get hired and the worst will get fired, like in every other business, until we get people who will do the job that the majority of Americans wants them to do. And when the people change their mind about the job which needs to be done (and we do every once in a while), iterate until done.


    11.01.2010: Excerpt from Market Minders dot com: "Put a Sock In It, Paul Krugman" ...

    Dear Paul Krugman: Enough Already!
    By Nick Kapur

    Thanks to Paul Krugman, my life is starting to resemble Groundhog Day. Essentially, every morning, when I pull up the New York Times on my BlackBerry, right after opening my eyes, I find myself reading the same article, from the same person, day in and day out -- just like Bill Murray found himself reliving the same terrible day over and over again.

    Meet Punxsutawney Paul

    The source of this madness, of course, is Paul Krugman, an intensely left-wing economist who seems convinced of his own omniscience. Lately, Krugman has been spouting off about what he thinks are the very specific reasons that fiscal stimulus failed, why Democrats are blowing it, and why Republicans are the largest entity standing between Americans and a decently healthy economy. And he's been doing this quite a lot.

    There are a few problems here that I'd like to confront. First, I'm getting pretty tired of reading the same article over and over again. Mr. Krugman, please try a fresh angle.

    Second (and far more significantly), while I fully believe that everybody is entitled to their own opinion, I, like most rational observers, also believe that no one can possibly know everything there is to know about something as complex as the U.S. economy.

    Overconfidence in action

    While Krugman is more qualified than most to provide commentary on the subject (at least, he is if you're swayed by a long career spent in classrooms), he seems to lack the basic intellectual humility necessary for effective thinking and writing.

    No one -- even economists -- fully understands how a complex, adaptive system like the U.S. economy really works. Yet that's precisely what Krugman is selling here with his excessively definitive stance on the issue.

    How many times do we need to be burned by economists (of any political stripe) and their lousy, confidence-laden predictions to learn that economists don't really know what they're talking about? How is it possible that Krugman can analyze the same economic history everyone else is looking at and come to the right conclusion, while everyone else is dead wrong?

    Answer: It's not a science

    The answer lies in the core of what an economist really studies. A science, by definition, is a body of knowledge that can provide the requisite conditions to replicate certain results repeatedly. If I mix two vials of this green stuff with one vial of the blue stuff, I know I'll get three vials of purple stuff … and so forth. But that isn't how economic theory works. If anything, economics is a pseudo-science that offers results that are only occasionally predictable, but never certain.

    A true scientific understanding of the economy would require the ability to read the future. Krugman can't do so. He may know more about what has worked in the past (which might be helpful if the past were always like the future), but his guess is as good as mine when it comes to predicting the next five years, five months, or five days.

    This is precisely what makes the existence of someone like Krugman particularly dangerous. He has the name, the brand, and the resume to sound like a credible authority on tea-leaf reading. He has the confidence and the knowledge to write convincingly on the subject, too. And he clearly has a conduit via the New York Times. But he obviously lacks the modesty to understand that even the most cogent of economic analysis is problematic, at best.

    End this waking nightmare

    I'm not an economist; I'm an investor. I couldn't really care less about whether the Obama administration is following the righteous, economic path to prosperity or not (mostly because I don't know what that path is -- and I know that nobody else does, either). My primary mission is to try to figure out ways to make money based on the probabilistic outcome of certain events.

    Krugman undoubtedly doesn't supply that kind of knowledge. Instead, he seems solely concerned with banging his head on a table, trying to convince the world that his particular brand of economic policy is the right kind. My best counsel is to be careful incorporating his advice into your own. His guess is, after all, just as good as yours.


  • Evolution

    10.28.2010: "Creation versus Evolution?" ... Excerpt from comments back to Jason Kelly...

    The problem here is that scientists and Christians use a different baseline to measure their findings.

    Scientists use data that is replicable, while religious people use dogma.

    There are also other differences. Scientists try to disprove their understandings of nature, while religious people are averse to trying to disprove their beliefs of nature.

    Scientists are overjoyed to find out their research has been overturned because it means they now know more than they did before, while religious people get upset to discover what they believed is no longer true. They believe their whole faith structure seems in jeopardy.

    And not to even mention the misrepresentation and misunderstanding of the Scientific Method itself by the Creationists...


  • Banks

    10.25.2010: "Bashing the Bank Piñata " ...
    By Fisher Investments Editorial Staff...

    • Despite best efforts by regulators, banks found ways around the onerous rules saddled on them.

    • No one can possibly anticipate the millions upon millions of ways customers interact with financial firms daily.

    • Some may interpret banks out-maneuvering regulators as negative, but keep in mind banks are just trying to be profitable.

    • Eventually Washington (and the media) will stop using Financials as piñata and move on to something else.

    Following the "most comprehensive and sweeping reforms ever adopted for credit card accounts" in 2008, the Federal Reserve announced plans to change the rules yet again this week. The latest round of changes aim to shore up "loopholes" in the cleverly titled Credit CARD Act (Credit Card Accountability Responsibility and Disclosure) of 2009. Despite best efforts by regulators, banks found ways around onerous rules -- adapting fees and interest rates to legally make up for revenue lost to regulatory limits.

    But of course they did! No regulator can possibly imagine the millions upon millions of ways customers interact with financial firms daily, let alone anticipate how new rules guiding them will work in practice. The profit motive is the mother of invention. The private sector will adapt -- that's what it does -- even as regulators can't or won't. Mind you, the slew of new rules introduced this year and last aren't terrific for Financials, but the flexibility demonstrated by credit card issuers is encouraging.

    Is ingenuity in the face of regulations wrong? No. Profitable banks are good! They make more loans. They innovate. They pay employees more and increase shareholder value. And profitable banks are good for consumers too -- the very people regulators hope to "protect." People value convenient ways to buy stuff and access debt. What would be the surest sign folks are getting ripped off? If credit card companies went the way of the dinosaurs. Firms charge fees commensurate with the risks they assume. If fees get too far out of whack, folks stop using cards and banks change course or go out of business. While that works in the private sector, there is no such signal or incentive for regulators -- so often their rules hit wide of the mark or become outdated almost as soon as they're enacted.

    Sentiment continues to be pretty dour regarding Financials and likely will be for some time. But it seems to be easing. One doesn't need to look past the much watered down Basel accord for proof financial regulation is already starting to lose steam. Eventually, at some point in the future, Washington (and the media) will stop bashing the bank piñata and move on to something else. (Don't worry, they'll find another sector to bash. Always happens that way.)


  • NPR

    10.24.2010: "We're All Bigots, Now" ...
    David Stokes: We Are All Bigots Now...

    The firing of Juan Williams by National Public Radio (NPR), alleging that he was guilty of bigotry during a recent appearance on Bill O'Reilly's FoxNews Channel television program, is another case of political correctness mixed with demagoguery run amuck.

    Here are the "horrific" words that did him in:

    "Look, Bill, I'm not a bigot. You know the kind of books I've written about the civil rights movement in this country. But when I get on the plane, I got to tell you, if I see people who are in Muslim garb and I think, you know, they are identifying themselves first and foremost as Muslims, I get worried. I get nervous."

    Frankly, there's nothing bigoted in the statement -- not at all. If there is, then we are all bigots now, and maybe that's the point National "Passive-Aggressive" Radio is trying to make. Williams' remark was not only a reflection of common sense; it's common sense that's widely shared. I find myself feeling the same way on occasion. A family member who recently flew to Detroit told me that after the plane was airborne, a man in "Muslim garb" (you know it when you see it) got up and bowed down in the aisle for some reason. Everyone who saw it was uncomfortable and it is doubtful anyone slept for the remainder of the flight.

    It was clearly an aircraft filled with bigots.

    The problem is that the people at NPR suffer from the same disorder as do Whoopi Goldberg, Joy Behar, and a growing multitude of naïve Americans. They fail to acknowledge the clear Muslim threat to America and our way of life. And when someone dares to mention the "M" word, some liberals are like 6-year olds with hands over their ears and yelling, "Blah, Blah, Blah, I Can't Hear You!"

    But it's worse than childish behavior on their part; it's willful ignorance.


  • Germany

    10.17.2010: "Germany begins to wake up." ...
    Merkel says German multiculturalism has failed...

    (Reuters) - Germany's attempt to create a multicultural society has "utterly failed," Chancellor Angela Merkel said on Saturday, adding fuel to a debate over immigration and Islam polarising her conservative camp.

    Merkel faces pressure from within her CDU to take a tougher line on immigrants who don't show a willingness to adapt to German society and her comments appeared intended to pacify her critics.


  • Negotiate

    10.10.2010: How to Negotiate with Communists and Mid-East "Governments"...

    Excerpt:
    "Arab League foreign ministers threw their weight behind the Palestinian president's refusal to negotiate with Israel unless it renews restrictions on West Bank settlement construction, but gave U.S. mediators another month to keep peace talks from collapsing.

    "The grace period, agreed to Friday night at a meeting of the 22-member Arab bloc in Libya, gave the U.S. some critical breathing room but also came with a warning to Israel of the dangerous consequences should it refuse to compromise."

    Response 1...

    Ooooh... and what exactly will they do in a month? Go to the General Assembly? Attack Israel and get wiped out (again..)? Full of crap as usual.

    What bugs me is that the Arabs are so stupid they can't see the lack of logic in their position. They put forward conditions (no building etc) but what if the land on which the building occurs now happens to be agreed to be Israeli after the talks finish?

    Response 2...

    This is the standard communist style of negotiating. Give me what I want or I won't even talk to you. Once you have done so, we can begin negotiations with you giving me what I want and me giving up nothing, or I walk away from the talks complaining about how you are being difficult. Iterate until done.

    But if the entire world press, the entire UN outside of America, and huge sections of people from all sides of the political spectrum because your opponent is Israel, are on your side, then the technique works. After all, Israel is the villain who has always committed atrocities on their "poor innocent Palestinian victims who have never done anything wrong and certainly have never harmed anyone," at least if you read the MSM or listen to any UN speech.


  • Critical

    10.07.2010: Excerpt from Jack Welch vs. HP's Board: Why He's Wrong and Why Apple Should Listen; Posted by Rob Enderle

    "....if you don't understand the cause of a problem, you'll probably never really fix it. Chronic mistakes, like fires, aren't fought by putting effort into extinguishing the flames, but by removing the fuel."

    This is exactly what I mean when I attempt to describe the lack of "Critical Thinking in the US' business management and elected political "leaders" today! Thanks, Rob!


  • Future

    10.07.2010: Great video on Youtube ...

    The future of our planet and the interactions between nations and economies will be very different from what we've experienced, even in the recent past. This excellent speech highlights many points worth considering, by individuals, educators and policy makers at all levels of governments.


  • Email

    09.30.2010: email, 01.27.2010...

    A man was out for a walk on a blustery night in Washington D.C.

    A robber in a mask walks up to him and says,
    "Give me your money."
    The man is afraid, and he says,
    "You can't do this, I'm a United States Congressman."
    The robber hesitates a moment, and replies,

    "Okay, in that case, give me MY money."


  • Finally

    09.29.2010: Subj: The Honeymoon is over.

    You know the honeymoon is over when the comedians start.

    The liberals are asking us to give Obama time. We agree . . . and think 25 to life would be appropriate.
    --Jay Leno

    America needs Obama-care like Nancy Pelosi needs a Halloween mask.
    --Jay Leno

    Q: Have you heard about McDonald's' new Obama Value Meal?
    A: Order anything you like and the guy behind you has to pay for it.
    --Conan O'Brien

    Q: What does Barack Obama call lunch with a convicted felon?
    A: A fund raiser.
    --Jay Leno

    Q: What's the difference between Obama's cabinet and a penitentiary?
    A: One is filled with tax evaders, blackmailers, and threats to society. The other is for housing prisoners.
    --David Letterman

    Q: If Nancy Pelosi and Obama were on a boat in the middle of the ocean and it started to sink, who would be saved?
    A: America !
    -- Jimmy Fallon

    Q: What's the difference between Obama and his dog, Bo?
    A: Bo has papers.
    -- Jimmy Kimmel

    Q: What was the most positive result of the "Cash for Clunkers" program?
    A: It took 95% of the Obama bumper stickers off the road.
    --David Letterman


  • Fairness

    09.28.2010: Finally, a state with balls... Texas warns book publishers: 'No more white-washing Islam' ...State board adopts resolution calling for fairness regarding world's religions


  • Jason Kelly

    08.29.2010: Finally, an honest view of American Politics, politicians and voters...
    Politics, politicians and voters, from Jason Kelly


  • Pakistan

    08.23.2010: Sorry... I have a dilemma... should this go on WTF or No Shit! ?
    No. 1 Nation in Sexy Web Searches? Call it Pornistan
    ...

    They may call it the "Land of the Pure," but Pakistan turns out to be anything but.

    Pakistan is top dog in searches per-person for "horse sex" since 2004, "donkey sex" since 2007, "rape pictures" between 2004 and 2009, "rape sex" since 2004, "child sex" between 2004 and 2007 and since 2009, "animal sex" since 2004 and "dog sex" since 2005, according to Google Trends and Google Insights, features of Google that generate data based on popular search terms.

    The country also is tops -- or has been No. 1 -- in searches for "sex," "camel sex," "rape video," "child sex video" and some other searches that can't be printed here.

    Ah, "both" works for me...


  • Barney

    08.19.2010: Voodoo Thoughts... which I've believed for many decades. ...Barney and Nancy, your lobotomies were 100% successful!



  • Mexico

    08.15.2010: I Love It!!! Mexico Is Angry!!! ...ROTFLOL, Mr. Obama!



  • Money

    08.15.2010: I can't wait to see this movie! ... link to YouTube... I Want Your Money Trailer (2010)



  • Phoenix

    08.11.2010: Arizona Governor vs. Phoenix Suns Owner

    This is a good way to explain things to people that don't understand.

    The owner of the Phoenix Suns basketball team, Robert Sarver, opposes AZ's new immigration laws.

    Arizona 's Governor, Jan Brewer, released the following statement in response to Sarver's criticism of the new law:

    "What if the owners of the Suns discovered that hordes of people were sneaking into games without paying?

    What if they had a good idea who the gate-crashers are, but the ushers and security personnel were not allowed to ask these folks to produce their ticket stubs, thus non-paying attendees couldn't be ejected.

    Furthermore, what if Suns' ownership was expected to provide those who sneaked in with complimentary eats and drink? And what if, on those days when a gate-crasher became ill or injured, the Suns had to provide free medical care and shelter?"

    - Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer

    Now does it make more sense to you??


  • Steve Wynn

    08.05.2010: Steve Wynn nails it...

    Do yourself a favor and listen to this then control the urge to move to another country.

    Subject: Who is Steve Wynn, and why is he saying this?

    What's equally amazing is that CNBC actually aired this -- CNBC, one of the WH's favorite propaganda machines!

    It was not even 2 hours after Steve Wynn's interview that he received a invitation from the tenants at 1600 Pennsylvania blvd, Washington , DC . 20500 wanting him to explain in person why he said what he said !!!

    Below is a short interview with Steve Wynn. Some of you know of him. He's a Multi Billionaire, Hotelier and Real Estate Investor in Las Vegas, Asia and Macau . He's been a guest from time to time on all the network financial news programs.

    If you listen to this recent CNBC interview (short & to the point) and nothing else today, you will be better informed than your neighbor about the state of the union.

    I would suggest sharing this with your children so they know what to expect once they're faced with the results.


  • War

    07.22.2010: Makes you want to say, "Now I get it!"

    From a friend's email...

    I was sitting in a restaurant eating lunch, and I overheard a conversation where one guy said something which really resonated with me:

    Q: Do you think that Obama and his people really understand what being "at war" means?
    A: Yes, they do understand it, but they reject the entire concept as unworthy of them. They believe that if they act in a more civilized manner, then our enemies will follow suit.

    Bingo! It is not that Obama etc are unintelligent: they are quite intelligent. It is not that they don't want to defend this country: they do, as much as you or I do, and as much as you or I wish they do. But in their heart of hearts they truly deny the concept of pure evil, and honestly believe that the people who are out to kill us are very much like us, and if we meet them half-way, they will do likewise.

    Obama, et.al., honestly believe if we close Gitmo, if we extend Constitutional protections to captured terrorists, if we give their countries money in order to upgrade their lifestyle, then our enemies will see that we are trying to be nicer, so they won't keep trying to kill us.

    It is not a flaw in character, it is not a sign of stupidity, it is not a lack of patriotism or desire to defend America, it is simply a world-view that can only exist in a tight, insular and closed circle of intellectuals who have never experienced the world outside of that circle, who deny that anything outside their circle even exists. Therefore, any input from people with evidence which conflicts with this world-view, is rejected as the ravings of a lunatic, because "no one could possibly think like that", speaking of both our enemies and the people who understand our enemies and recommend strong action against them.

    This is the fundamental difference in the thinking of liberals and conservatives in the war on terror.


  • Allergies

    07.06.2010: OK, seriously, now, "No Shit!"

    Junk Mail...

    "If you have food allergies, you are likely to be allergic to common food. Take care!"


    First Rev: 07.07.2010